The Marshall Plan vs Morgenthau Plan - Essay Example

The Marshall Plan vs. Morgenthau Plan The Marshall Plan was a sequence of economic policies and reforms that facilitated the strengthening of Western Europe post-World War II. It also aided to make the United States the spearhead of the free world. A study of the post-World war tactics for the economic recovery of Europe reveals the Morgenthau Plan and the Marshall Plan. The Morgenthau Plan was used to disable Germany not to cause war ever again post-World War I (Fulbrook 12). On the other hand, the Marshall Plan was employed after the Second World War in an aim to rebuild a week, war-torn Europe. It is worth mentioning that the Morgenthau Plan existed as an underprivileged policy choice. As a result, it forced Germany into a decline and deindustrialization hurting the rest of the world in relation to economics and world security. It may be argued that this was a major factor in initiating the Second World War. On the other hand, the Marshall Plan was noted to create righteous circles of growth resulting to being the most favorable policy that developing nations ought to use (Fulbrook 16). The Morgenthau Plan was not implemented because this plan stressed on reindustrialization. As a result, it depressed carrying capacity in relation to population, forced institutions to failure, and agricultural yields to severely decline. It is worth noting that globalization acts on all emerging nations in the same way the Morgenthau Plan operated on Germany post-World War I. While globalization brought nothing but regression to low-income countries, it conveyed more wealth and prosperity to high-income states. Thus, instead of a merging of income, there is a rising divergence of nation’s proceeds. This was notably not in line to what the European countries required to save them from the effects of the war. It is worth noting that the war left Europe in dreadful economic shape. This is because majority of the survivors were homeless, hungry, and unemployed. The employed were not safe either, because inflation robbed the little, they earned. Moreover, manufacturing works, railroads, connections, water systems, and electric power plants were spoiled or demolished. Farmers suffered from famine and when their products were brought to the market, city residents could not manage to pay for them. This resulted to the United States to implement the Marshall Plan to aid in the reduction of the awful aftermath of the war. The U.S., therefore, helped reconstruct the economic well-being and potency of European society. It is worth noting that this was not just a humanitarian aid, but was the finest way to combat communism in Europe. This is because the European nations accepting U.S. aid needed to function as an economic unit. Moreover, a reconstructed Europe would benefit the United States by yet again being able to purchase American factory and farm harvests. More significantly, a frugally strong Europe would halt the spread of communalism (Turner and Henry 209). However, the Soviets rejected Marshall’s request to help grow a plan to rebuild Europe. They (Soviets) said that his plan stood as an arrangement to rule Europe economically. The Eastern European nations that were under Soviets control, therefore, failed to participate. In a meeting that took place in Paris in 1947, America was disappointed in the direction the plan was taking. This is because 16 Western European nations came with a distinct “shopping list," list”, other than taking a unified plan for Europe as a whole. Moreover, western Germany that was occupied by Britain, France, and the United States was thought to remain economically unstable hence not eligible to receive much of the Marshall Plan aid. The French assumed this would stop Germany from ever again going to combat. However, Marshall stressed the significance of full German participation. He saw it as essential for the economic recapture of Western Europe. The Marshall Plan was noted to do numerous necessary things. These were providing philanthropic aid for war-torn Europe to avert another economic desolation in the United States. This was to be achieved through making Europe a market for American products. However, the most influential argument for Congress and the American community was that the Marshall Plan would reduce the spread of communism. During the next four years, from the year 1947, the United States delivered over $13 billion in relief to 16 Western European states, as well as West Germany. When Europe accepted the implementation of the Marshall Plan, a lot of changes occurred to German. One of the main changes was the denazification of Germany. This resulted to individual liberty, genuine independence pegged with free institutions. It is worth noting that these mentioned results were the basic purpose of the Marshall Plan. It resulted to the coverage of food requirements, reduced housing troubles and made medicine more accessible. Moreover, through reconstruction of factories, bridges and railroads, agricultural and industrial production up surged. In addition, this plan aided to fight inflation in German hence create financial stability and build a mutual market free of national trade barricades. Furthermore, advisory groups operated on improving European production, labor-management relations, and business organization (Fulbrook 43). It is worth noting that due to the reduction of denazification, the Europeans had the freedom to decide how to share the American aid among the 16 nations. They, sometimes, differed over how much each nation ought to get. The United States continuously pressured them to negotiate hence make “collective use” of the aid to restore Europe as a whole. Many Europeans were cynical of American objectives, particularly in France. However, as the Marshall Plan took course, skepticism plummeted. In a 1947 survey, 47 percent of French residents thought Marshall’s plan for aiding Europe was primarily to stimulate markets for U.S. merchandises. It is worth mentioning that a mere 18 percent saw the aid as a “genuine desire to help.” By the year 1953, 57 percent of the French general public understood the Marshall Plan to be “indispensable” or “useful." Only 14 percent conveyed negative opinions, and these opinions came devastatingly from communist supporters (Turner and Henry 227). When the Marshall Plan ended in 1951, industrial output in Western Europe had escalated 40 percent beyond the prewar level. Trade and exports also amplified far above what they stood before the war. People resumed work and their standard of living rose. Politically, communist parties lost power everywhere. It is worth noting that after Czechoslovakia, no European state fell to communism. As a result, this was a favor to the United States, giving their goods a place to sell (Fulbrook 134). However, the Marshall Plan failed to treat all of Europe’s economic problems. Western Europe still imported 30 percent of its food in 1951. Price rises remained a problem, in particular, countries. The Marshall Plan’s suggestion of a common market for Europe persisted just as an idea (Turner and Henry 222). Works Cited Fulbrook, Mary. A Concise History of Germany. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Print. Turner, Henry A, and Henry A. Turner. Germany from Partition to Reunification. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992. Print. Read More